Visible women, invisible gender: Knowledge production on homelessness in Flanders

M. Mostowska
{"title":"Visible women, invisible gender: Knowledge production on homelessness in Flanders","authors":"M. Mostowska","doi":"10.1177/13505068241255481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Homelessness as a distinct social problem is a relatively recent social construct. Many women are thought to experience so-called ‘hidden homelessness’, which is said to be the cause of their under-representation in the data. However, data now show a higher proportion of women among those experiencing homelessness. In addition, current definitions explicitly include women’s specific experiences such as living under the threat of violence. This article attempts to explore this contradiction between the alleged invisibility and the increased presence of women in the broader population experiencing homelessness, particularly in the Flemish context. First, the marginalisation and housing precariousness of women is analysed from a historical perspective, from the mid 1800s to the recent federalisation of Belgium. Second, it examines the current production of knowledge about homelessness. The article shows that women’s housing precariousness was conspicuous in the past, even if it was not framed as homelessness. The practices of categorising women and representing gender are explored in current reports, statistical data and expert discourses. The recent ‘numericisation’ of homelessness research, the methods and categorisations used to produce quantitative data, are constantly caught up in existing knowledge, policies and evaluations. As a result, other variables, such as household composition or housing situation, override gender. Fragmented policies and individual responses on the ground contribute to a multiplicity of discourses and a lack of advocacy for women’s homelessness as a distinct social problem. For organisations working and advocating for migrants, migration, not gender, is the defining dimension of vulnerability. For women’s organisations, gender meant inequality manifested in domestic and intimate partner violence. The discourses on these two groups make gender an ambiguous dimension of homelessness. As a result, existing data on homelessness is rarely analysed from a gender perspective. This in turn can hinder the introduction of more gender-sensitive policies.","PeriodicalId":312959,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Women's Studies","volume":"2 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Women's Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13505068241255481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Homelessness as a distinct social problem is a relatively recent social construct. Many women are thought to experience so-called ‘hidden homelessness’, which is said to be the cause of their under-representation in the data. However, data now show a higher proportion of women among those experiencing homelessness. In addition, current definitions explicitly include women’s specific experiences such as living under the threat of violence. This article attempts to explore this contradiction between the alleged invisibility and the increased presence of women in the broader population experiencing homelessness, particularly in the Flemish context. First, the marginalisation and housing precariousness of women is analysed from a historical perspective, from the mid 1800s to the recent federalisation of Belgium. Second, it examines the current production of knowledge about homelessness. The article shows that women’s housing precariousness was conspicuous in the past, even if it was not framed as homelessness. The practices of categorising women and representing gender are explored in current reports, statistical data and expert discourses. The recent ‘numericisation’ of homelessness research, the methods and categorisations used to produce quantitative data, are constantly caught up in existing knowledge, policies and evaluations. As a result, other variables, such as household composition or housing situation, override gender. Fragmented policies and individual responses on the ground contribute to a multiplicity of discourses and a lack of advocacy for women’s homelessness as a distinct social problem. For organisations working and advocating for migrants, migration, not gender, is the defining dimension of vulnerability. For women’s organisations, gender meant inequality manifested in domestic and intimate partner violence. The discourses on these two groups make gender an ambiguous dimension of homelessness. As a result, existing data on homelessness is rarely analysed from a gender perspective. This in turn can hinder the introduction of more gender-sensitive policies.
看得见的女性,看不见的性别:佛兰德关于无家可归者的知识生产
无家可归作为一个独特的社会问题是一个相对较新的社会概念。许多妇女被认为经历了所谓的 "隐性无家可归",据说这是其在数据中代表性不足的原因。然而,现在的数据显示,妇女在无家可归者中所占比例更高。此外,目前的定义明确包括了妇女的特殊经历,如生活在暴力威胁之下。本文试图探讨女性在更广泛的无家可归者群体中,尤其是在佛兰德地区,所谓的被忽视与日益增加的存在之间的矛盾。首先,文章从历史的角度分析了从 19 世纪中期到最近比利时联邦化的过程中妇女被边缘化和住房不稳定的问题。其次,文章研究了当前有关无家可归问题的知识生产。文章表明,在过去,妇女住房的不稳定性是显而易见的,即使它没有被定性为无家可归。文章探讨了当前报告、统计数据和专家论述中对妇女进行分类和表现性别的做法。最近无家可归问题研究的 "数值化",以及用于产生定量数据的方法和分类,不断被现有的知识、政策和评估所囿。因此,其他变量,如家庭组成或住房情况,就会凌驾于性别之上。支离破碎的政策和个人在当地的反应造成了论述的多样性,以及缺乏对妇女无家可归这一独特社会问题的宣传。对于为移民工作和开展宣传的组织而言,移民而非性别是脆弱性的决定性因素。对于妇女组织来说,性别意味着不平等,表现为家庭暴力和亲密伴侣暴力。关于这两个群体的论述使性别成为无家可归问题的一个模糊层面。因此,现有的无家可归数据很少从性别角度进行分析。这反过来又会阻碍出台对性别问题更加敏感的政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信